Timelock/Time-whitelist Antagonist Roles

[Rosetango]

Lately we've had an influx of shitters or new players who just toggle all antags on and bog down regular gimmicks. I feel like a time lock on these roles, similar to the security one, is necessary given the status of our server (HRP) and the incredibly LRP nature of these players on top of our typical pop. I think a minimum of three days would be fine, with a maximum of a week or more. What does everybody else think?

[kyres1]

We already have this iirc, like a week before you can actually play any antag. An antag cooldown makes more sense imho so you can't back-to-back antag

[Rosetango]

We do? I don't think so, but if an admin can weigh in on this that'd be great. If the time lock already exists, then I guess what I'm asking for next is an increase in the time.

[Scheveningen]

It is known to be on-again off-again at the moment. I have raised the issue up to Arrow already.

[Carver]

36 minutes ago, kyres1 said:

An antag cooldown makes more sense imho so you can't back-to-back antag

This is a wonderful idea until one realizes it's generally back-to-back as only particular people tend to have antag roles enabled. It's not a problem until someone rolls twice in one round on two characters, which honestly shouldn't be a thing.

[Mogelix]

The issue isn't a influx of shitters, it's that regulars and HRPers have lost interest and deactivated their antag roles.

As my early characters, I had most if not all antags active. As Collins, progressively less and less. As Berko, I started with traitor, head rev and head loy, and ended with none. I have 'carried', organised lots of very new rev teams who often don't even know what the RPS does, but it's just too tiring to do so.

You got tired of playing with the same toys, no? The issue isn't anti-antagonistic forces (security) being too strong or restrictive, or some imaginary wave of shitters. It's simple, the percentage of good experienced antags has decreased, and the bad inexperienced antags take up the good antags role. We are a fine, great community. But we are stagnating, because a good amount of people, including me stick around here because of the antagonists and the interest and intrigue in a HRP enviroment, but those same people and others no longer want to play said antagonists, collectively burnt out and tired of the same thing.

This could end in alot of ways, including the following:

The new players improve and the natural ban filter takes effect.

The aforementioned chunk of the intrigue playerbases psyche changes, and we move away from antagonist round types.

The server declines to obscurity, as a chainreaction of lower playercounts shoos away the people who don't care that much about antagonists.

It might be that I'm overanalysing, I'm just stupid and edgily obsessed with the extreme worst case scenarios/doom and gloom possibilities.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Mogelix

[Pratepresidenten]

There is a system like this in place but its broken. Its awaiting a grand fix!

[Kaed]

4 hours ago, Mogelix said:

The issue isn't a influx of shitters, it's that regulars and HRPers have lost interest and deactivated their antag roles.

As my early characters, I had most if not all antags active. As Collins, progressively less and less. As Berko, I started with traitor, head rev and head loy, and ended with none. I have 'carried', organised lots of very new rev teams who often don't even know what the RPS does, but it's just too tiring to do so.

You got tired of playing with the same toys, no? The issue isn't anti-antagonistic forces (security) being too strong or restrictive, or some imaginary wave of shitters. It's simple, the percentage of good experienced antags has decreased, and the bad inexperienced antags take up the good antags role. We are a fine, great community. But we are stagnating, because a good amount of people, including me stick around here because of the antagonists and the interest and intrigue in a HRP enviroment, but those same people and others no longer want to play said antagonists, collectively burnt out and tired of the same thing.

This could end in alot of ways, including the following:

The new players improve and the natural ban filter takes effect.

The aforementioned chunk of the intrigue playerbases psyche changes, and we move away from antagonist round types.

The server declines to obscurity, as a chainreaction of lower playercounts shoos away the people who don't care that much about antagonists.

It might be that I'm overanalysing, I'm just stupid and edgily obsessed with the extreme worst case scenarios/doom and gloom possibilities.

I myself have disabled all of the group antagonist types, rev/merc/heist/cult, because I've become grumpy and jaded and don't trust people anymore to not be shits.

Even my single player antagonist runs have been increasing unpopular with players because I've largely given up on giving people a chance to not screw me over.

And yet, playing an antagonist or being the counterforce for them is 90% of the reason I even bother to come on the server anymore. Most of the times that I I'm not a head of staff, I only log in long enough on my throw away cargo guwan to see if I'm an antag then cryo immediately afterward if I'm not. Often times my interest in the round in entirely evaporates the moment I have been caught and I just want to cryo then.

I will admit, though, that despite my many faults as an antagonist over the last few months, I have noticed a trend on this server that people act scornful towards people who want to be an antagonist. The increasingly pervasive mentality but you have to want to sit around and talk to people at a desk or bar for 2+ hours as the only way to 'high roleplay' has become somewhat of a problem. Naturally none of them feel that they are the problem, but rather us dirty antagonist people who won't let them play extended every round are the issue.

I don't think that adding a cooldown between antagonists just going to help anything, nor do I particularly think the extra week playing on the server mitigates people being bad antagonist, even if it did work. There are definitely bad antagonists, but a lot of the problem with situations where there's a 'bad antagonist' is that they're actually it experienced with the culture of the server rather than the antagonist themselves.

There are all sorts of unwritten rules that our player base will try to enforce on you, such as that it's tacky and improper to attack a head of staff or Captain within the first half hour of the round. Or that trying to use your mechanics to dominate or enthrall or convert people is shitty unless you give them a specific amount of roleplay that varies between people first, or accidentally picked the wrong victim for one of these mechanics who secretly hates it and will fume at you in LOOC or even straight up cryo instantly. (The irony that this is an okay response to being forcibly converted or thralled but antagonists who ghost/cryo after being caught are frequently ripped on by the player base is an amusing double standard that hasn't been lost on me) 

And don't even get me started on the complicated network of secret rules that people make up about when it's okay to kill someone. (usually the answer is 'never because I don't like dying').

Either way in most situations if you accidentally break one of these unwritten rules you get shit on by everyone who can possibly do it, as they completely discard any attempts to indulge you or cut you slack after your transgressions (assuming they even did in the first place). As an antagonist you have to learn what actions will get (or lose you) you the 'respect' of security players and others, and you can only do that by actually being an antagonist and making the right mistakes and adapting to the negative feedback you get. Time not being an antagonist will not let you learn these issues and how to avoid them.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Kaed

[Skull132]

They are whitelisted by time. Buuut the system is somewhat broke. So I need to fix it.

[Ornias]

1 hour ago, Kaed said:

if you accidentally break one of these unwritten rules you get shit on by everyone who can possibly do it,

this is basically the entire gamestate rn

[KingOfThePing]

3 hours ago, Kaed said:

The increasingly pervasive mentality but you have to want to sit around and talk to people at a desk or bar for 2+ hours as the only way to 'high roleplay' has become somewhat of a problem.

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that the only thing you can do without antag involvement (e.g. extended) is sitting around doing nothing. Please explain.

[Kaed]

5 hours ago, KingOfThePing said:

I don't know how you come to the conclusion that the only thing you can do without antag involvement (e.g. extended) is sitting around doing nothing. Please explain.

This is hyperbole, I know people do more and extended round than sit and talk, but the rounds do not revolve around a central concept of conflict or danger, like antagonist rounds do.

Science Station office work does not interest me, and while some people are interested in in it and that's okay, the problem I'm trying to point out is that the people who do like station office work roleplay are extremely scornful to people who want antagonists, acting like wanting that means you don't like to rolelay. 

Edited July 30, 2019 by Kaed

[KingOfThePing]

But you make that sound like that is a bad thing? Isn't what roleplaying (without antagonists) is about driving the story of your own character? By interacting with others, that can also be done while doing your assigned work. I feel like people often think "man X would be cool but we can't do X, because Y". Be creative, guys, you can do a lot, even without fighting and chaos.

[Kaed]

29 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said:

But you make that sound like that is a bad thing? Isn't what roleplaying (without antagonists) is about driving the story of your own character? By interacting with others, that can also be done while doing your assigned work. I feel like people often think "man X would be cool but we can't do X, because Y". Be creative, guys, you can do a lot, even without fighting and chaos.

I understand what you're saying here, but you are again presupposing the 'correct' way to roleplay is the way that you envision it, which is part of the exact problem I'm trying to point out here. I generally don't go into rounds with the desire to experience the 'compelling' roleplay of being a cargo tech doing his job sorting the warehouse and taking orders while chatting with various bland character archetypes like the surly miner #837 and the gruff security guard #729, it's for the thrill of being a cargo tech or other role when things start to go wrong, and reacting to that chaos (or being the cause of the chaos, playing a villain is fun).

I went through my phase years ago where I gave a damn about developing my characters into plotlines, but after a while it gets really dull and disappointing when people vanish or a plot goes nowhere, or you start to see player trends in characters that make them blend into a homogeneous slurry. This is a workplace, you're not encouraged to be too unique and different or you start getting questions like 'why is this person employed here?' popping up. Characters like Shane Castralo, who break the mold by being interesting and funny (if annoying at times) are few and far between, and they are memorable.  I couldn't even tell you the names of most of the coworkers in my shifts during extended rounds, they tend to blend together.

Honestly, I think the greatest enemy to extended being a popular game more is the stagnant quality of every round taking place in the same setting, the same station, with the same expectations that everyone is employees of a supercompany.  You can't play anything outside of that demographic category, like a senile old man, a crazy war vet lurking on his porch with a shotgun, a nosy housewife who spies on her neighbors, or any number of other things that are funny and interesting and only exist outside of a corporate setting.  Everyone is here to do a job first and be an individual second.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Kaed

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I agree with everything kaed said 

[UnknownMurder]

We're off topic from what's OP's point.

All we know it's awaiting a grand fix so yay. I agree with having a better system for recording player's active time, not just inactive and active time. I mean a literal active time. 

[Scheveningen]

19 hours ago, Carver said:

This is a wonderful idea until one realizes it's generally back-to-back as only particular people tend to have antag roles enabled. It's not a problem until someone rolls twice in one round on two characters, which honestly shouldn't be a thing.

200% agree with this. It's agitating to deal with the same characters who roll antag 3 rounds in a row.

[Carver]

1 hour ago, Scheveningen said:

200% agree with this. It's agitating to deal with the same characters who roll antag 3 rounds in a row.

My point wasn't that, but rather that I don't like when, for example; someone rolls antag, they die, they respawn, their next character in the same round rolls it again.

[Scheveningen]

oh okay i misread that

yeah okay arguably that's worse

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Let new players learn and have fun and make mistakes! -1

[VTCobaltblood]

56 minutes ago, Marlon Phoenix said:

Let new players learn and have fun and make mistakes!

Antagonists are a round-driving force. I don't want new players who barely know controls and RP, and just want to "learn and have fun and make mistakes" to ruin my round. 

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

Mistakes are how you learn! We were all balds once. Try to have fun with them, not turn them into an "other" that need to sit around

[geeves]

Moving to Projects: https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/7400